NEW CLAUSE.—(Provision as to certain India office provident funds.) (Hansard, 29 April 1935)

§ The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Butler)
I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
These are three old funds which have long since been closed to fresh entrants, but there are certain beneficiaries still drawing benefits in the shape of pensions. All these funds are non-votable, and this new Clause continues their non-votability, 69 and secures their payment from the revenues of India. The Regular Widows' Fund was established in 1820 for the benefit of the widows and families of those people employed in the home service of the East India Company. The word "Regular" derives from the phrase "The regular home establishment" of the old East India Company. This establishment included, broadly speaking, the superior, or officer, class who served the old East India Company, and there are a few beneficiaries of this fund still alive. The Elders Widows' Fund was established in the same year for the benefit of the wives and families of people employed in the home service of the East India Company who were regarded as members of what was known in those old days as the extra department. The Elder, in the strict sense of the term, was an overseer of labour in the warehouses of the East India Company. The persons who subscribed to the Elders Widows' Fund included, however, extra clerks, attendants, messengers and other subordinates. Therefore, between them these two funds comprise certain beneficiaries, not very many—in fact, they are few in number—who continue to draw benefit from these ancient funds which are, as I said, now closed to new entrants.
Payments from these two funds were made out of capital investments which were held by the Secretary of State in Council, and under the original 60 Queen Victoria, Chapter 11, the Secretary of State was charged with the payment of sums out of the revenues of India if these original capital sums were exhausted. Those original capital sums are not completely exhausted, but the contingency of their finally being exhausted must be provided for in this new Bill which we are in process of passing. The India Office Provident Fund, the third referred to in this new Clause, was instituted in 1877 to provide pensions to the widows of members of the permanent staff of the Secretary of State who were not subscribers to either of the other two funds to which I have referred. This fund was closed in 1885. The money in the fund was handed over to the Secretary of State under an order of court and the duty was laid upon him to guarantee the payment to the dependants of the original subscribers to this particular India Office Provident Fund. Therefore, the Committee will 70 see that in moving this new Clause we are doing something which I am sure will meet with approval on every side of the Committee, that is, to save the benefits for a few surviving dependants, probably elderly daughters, of the original subscribers to these three funds. I have attempted to give the Committee every particular about these funds and to show that in passing this new Act we do not want to check any payments which would normally be paid to beneficiaries under these funds.

§ Viscount WOLMER
Can my hon. Friend tell us the number of beneficiaries affected? I do not think he mentioned that.

§ Sir PERCY HARRIS
What is the amount of money involved?

§ Mr. H. WILLIAMS
The sum cannot be very great, owing to the fact that the bulk of the people who were originally members of the fund have now passed away, but it is rather interesting that those pensions were originally based, apparently, on capital sums in the hands of the Secretary of State. I understand there are still certain sums in his possession, but that there is a possibility that the income from these funds will not be adequate to meet all these pensions. The Clause is accordingly brought forward as a safeguard to provide that if there is any deficiency in these capital sums, the requisite sums are to be provided out of the non-votable revenues of the Federation. I think we ought to know what is the present actuarial liability, that is to say, what is the capital sum estimated to be necessary to give the Secretary of State in order to meet the liabilities, in addition to what is already in his possession.
I am glad the Clause has been tabled. It is a safeguard, if not as complete as some of us would like, with the capital sums definitely placed in the hands of the Secretary of State. But one would like to know why, when these funds were started, they gave them such curious names. The Regular Widows' Fund suggests that there must have been some other fund to which the irregular widows belonged. There is also the question of the Elders Widows' Fund, not the "elder widows," and I would like to 71 know what an elder was who had a widow.

§ Mr. BUTLER
Replying first to my hon. Friend the Member for South Croydon (Mr. H. Williams), I thought he might have heard in my original statement, which I attempted to make as comprehensive as possible, the definition of an Elder. He asked me some important questions as to the exact state of these funds and the amount of money involved in these payments. In my original remarks, when I referred to the possibility of the capital sums held by the Secretary of State being exhausted and said there was provision for the money to be paid from the revenues of India, I did not imply that there was any immediate likelihood of these funds being exhausted. In fact, the sums involved for all the dependants of these funds are only a few hundreds a year, and certainly in total not over £1,000 a year.

§ Viscount WOLMER
All three funds?

§ Mr. BUTLER
Yes. Therefore, the liability is very small indeed, but in the unfortunate event of the funds not lasting out sufficiently to meet the money necessary for the last surviving beneficiary of these funds, we have made it certain that the money will be forthcoming from the revenues of India. The total number of beneficiaries under the first two funds is 30 between them, and under the last fund, while it is not absolutely certain, it cannot be more than approximately a dozen.